In a bold legal move, California Gov. Gavin Newsom has launched a $787 million lawsuit against Fox News, alleging the network defamed him through misleading coverage of a phone call with President Donald Trump during recent unrest in Los Angeles.
According to Breitbart, the lawsuit, filed on Friday in Delaware Superior Court, claims Fox News host Jesse Watters misrepresented a conversation between Newsom and Trump to falsely depict the governor as dishonest, damaging his reputation amid the Los Angeles immigration protests.
The controversy stems from events earlier this month when President Trump ordered 2,000 National Guard troops to Los Angeles to address escalating anti-ICE demonstrations.
These protests had drawn significant attention, prompting federal intervention to maintain order in the city. On June 7, Newsom spoke with Trump for roughly 16 minutes, a day after the National Guard deployment was announced. This call would later become the centerpiece of the dispute between Newsom and Fox News.
On June 10, Trump reportedly stated he had spoken to Newsom "a day ago," a claim Newsom disputed as inaccurate since their last conversation occurred three days prior. The lawsuit alleges that Fox News seized on this discrepancy to question Newsom’s honesty. During a prime-time segment, host Jesse Watters allegedly asked on air why Newsom would deny Trump’s outreach, while displaying a screenshot of the June 7 call log obtained by reporter John Roberts.
Newsom’s legal team contends that Watters’ program edited a video of Trump’s remarks in a misleading way to bolster the narrative against the governor. The suit argues this portrayal painted Newsom as untruthful, ignoring the actual timeline of events. According to Politico, the edited content was used to support Watters’ on-air claims, which the lawsuit describes as defamatory.
The filing in Delaware, where Fox News is incorporated, asserts that the segment harmed Newsom’s standing among voters. This damage, the suit claims, could have lasting effects on his political future, including a widely anticipated presidential run in 2028. Newsom’s attorneys argue that the reporting meets the legal threshold for defamation by showing malice and disregard for verifiable facts.
Under U.S. law, public officials like Newsom must prove that a media outlet acted with intentional harm or reckless disregard for the truth to win a defamation case. Historically, politicians have shied away from such lawsuits due to the difficulty of meeting this standard. Many accept critical or inaccurate coverage as an inherent part of public life, making Newsom’s action notable.
In his statements, Newsom referenced a prior $787.5 million settlement Fox News paid to Dominion Voting Systems over misleading reports following the 2020 election. He suggested a similar accountability should apply in his case for what he calls false reporting. The amount sought in this lawsuit, $787 million, appears to mirror the Dominion settlement as a benchmark for damages.
Newsom has publicly criticized Fox News, accusing the network of spreading falsehoods on behalf of Trump. “If Fox News wants to lie to the American people on Donald Trump’s behalf, it should face consequences — just like it did in the Dominion case,” Newsom said in a statement to TheWrap. “I believe the American people should be able to trust the information they receive from a major news outlet. Until Fox is willing to be truthful, I will keep fighting against their propaganda machine,” he added.
Fox News, in turn, has dismissed the lawsuit as baseless and politically motivated. “Gov. Newsom’s transparent publicity stunt is frivolous and designed to chill free speech critical of him,” a Fox News spokesperson stated. “We will defend this case vigorously and look forward to it being dismissed,” the spokesperson continued.
The lawsuit raises questions about the balance between free speech and accountability for media outlets. As a high-profile figure, Newsom’s decision to pursue legal action could set a precedent for how public officials address perceived media bias. It also highlights the ongoing tension between political leaders and news organizations in an era of polarized discourse.
Legal experts note that defamation cases involving public figures are notoriously hard to win due to the stringent requirements for proving malice. Newsom’s team will need to demonstrate that Fox News knowingly or recklessly aired false information to harm his reputation. The outcome of this case could influence how media outlets cover political figures in the future.
With speculation about a 2028 presidential bid, the lawsuit adds another layer of complexity to Newsom’s public image. Whether voters perceive this as a stand against media falsehoods or a political maneuver remains to be seen. The case’s resolution could shape public trust in both Newsom and Fox News as the legal process unfolds.